Mount Aldie, LLC v. Land Trust of Virginia, Inc.
About This Legal Opinion
The appellate court interpreted the overlay zone of tighter restrictions on the buffer area as alternate restrictions. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded disagreeing with the trial court's reading of the conservation easement.
Membership Required
This resource is a Land Trust Alliance member benefit for the staff, board and volunteers of land trust and affiliate member organizations, and Alliance donors at the Protector level.
Mount Aldie, LLC v. Land Trust of Virginia (2017 trial court opinion)
In 2008, a landowner gifted a conservation easement over a 60-acre wooded parcel to the Land Trust of Virginia that established a 100-foot buffer area along the Little River. Mount Aldie purchased the property in 2009 and in 2013 conducted tree removal and grading activities within the buffer area.
Mount Aldie, LLC v. Land Trust of Virginia, Inc. – Opinion on remand
In 2008, a landowner gifted a conservation easement over a 60-acre wooded parcel to the Land Trust of Virginia that established a 100-foot buffer area along the Little River. This case is an unfortunate example of the perils of conservation easement drafting.
Mount Aldie, LLC v. Land Trust of Virginia, Inc. (second appeal)
In 2008, a landowner gifted a conservation easement over a 60-acre wooded parcel to the Land Trust of Virginia that established a 100-foot buffer area along the Little River. This case is an unfortunate example of the perils of conservation easement drafting.
W.O.R.C. Realty Corp. v. Town of Islip
The appellate court reversed the trial court on the collateral estoppel issue, finding that the earlier property tax action did not address the issue of the validity of the easement. However, the appellate court went on to rule for the town based on the statute of limitations defense.
Creed v. Clogston appeal
The court reversed and remanded for additional findings on the intent of grantor when executing the deed containing the deed restrictions.
Desert Foothills Land Trust, Inc. v. Olsen et al.
Division One of the Arizona Court of Appeals reversed and remanded, holding that DFLT did have standing to bring its action because the road construction activities, even though occurring outside the conservation easement area, nevertheless might harm the conservation easement area.
Mohonk Preserve v Pardini, Fink, and Taylor II
The trial court conducted a lengthy bench trial and ultimately ruled in favor of challenger to land trust title. The appellate court reversed, finding several flaws with the trial court's analysis.
Parker, et al., vs. Grand River Partners, Inc., et al., Court of
The Court found for the land trust on all counts and interpreted the conservation easement in all respects as the land trust did.
Lyme Land Conservation Trust, Inc. v. Platner (Lyme V)
In December 2019, the Connecticut Supreme Court held that the trial judge was required to disqualify himself and the case was remanded to the trial court to resolve the damages issues before a different judge.
Mohonk Preserve v Pardini, Fink, and Taylor III
The trial court conducted a lengthy bench trial and ultimately ruled in favor of Fink. The appellate court reversed, finding several flaws with the trial court's analysis. New York Court of Appeals refused to hear an appeal